Patel Neelkumar, Bandyopadhyay Dhrubajyoti, Agarwal Gaurav, Chakraborty Sandipan, Kumar Ashish, Hajra Adrija, Amgai Birendra, Krittanawong Chayakrit, Martin Lily, Abbott J Dawn, Mamas Mamas A, Naidu Srihari S
Department of Cardiology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.
Department of Cardiology, Westchester Medical Center at New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York, USA.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 May;99(6):1741-1749. doi: 10.1002/ccd.30159. Epub 2022 Apr 2.
The aim of this study is to compare outcomes of rotational atherectomy and cutting balloon (RACB) versus rotational atherectomy and plain balloon (RAPB) before drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in calcified coronary lesions.
Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing RACB with RAPB were identified through a systematic search of published literature across multiple databases. Random effect meta-analysis was performed to compare the outcome between the two groups.
Four studies were included in the meta-analysis (three observational and one RCT) involving a total of 315 patients. 166 patients had RACB, and 149 patients had RAPB before DES placement with a median follow-up of 11.5 months. Compared with patients who had RAPB there was no difference in MACE (composite of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) (odds ratio [OR]: 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25-2.18], slow flow/no reflow (OR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.23-2.16), all-cause mortality (OR: 2.02; 95% CI: 0.28-14.60), and device success rate (OR: 1.79; 95% CI: 0.28-11.18) in the RACB approach. There was a benefit towards less target lesion revascularization in the RACB group; however, this outcome was reported in two studies (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.08-0.99). On meta-regression there was no association between age, sex, diabetes, or lesion location with MACE and all-cause mortality. The studies were homogenous across all outcomes.
RACB, as compared with RAPB, had a similar risk of MACE, all-cause mortality, device success, and complication, but a lower risk of target lesion revascularization.
本研究旨在比较在药物洗脱支架(DES)植入前,应用旋磨联合切割球囊(RACB)与旋磨联合普通球囊(RAPB)治疗钙化冠状动脉病变的疗效。
通过系统检索多个数据库中的已发表文献,确定比较RACB与RAPB的随机对照试验(RCT)和观察性研究。采用随机效应荟萃分析比较两组的疗效。
荟萃分析纳入4项研究(3项观察性研究和1项RCT),共315例患者。166例患者接受RACB治疗,149例患者在DES植入前接受RAPB治疗,中位随访时间为11.5个月。与接受RAPB治疗的患者相比,RACB治疗组的主要不良心血管事件(MACE,包括死亡、心肌梗死和靶血管血运重建)(比值比[OR]:0.74;95%置信区间[CI]:0.25 - 2.18)、慢血流/无复流(OR:0.71;95% CI:0.23 - 2.16)、全因死亡率(OR:2.02;95% CI:0.28 - 14.60)及器械成功率(OR:1.79;95% CI:0.28 - 11.18)无差异。RACB组靶病变血运重建率较低;然而,仅有两项研究报道了这一结果(OR:0.29;95% CI:0.08 - 0.99)。meta回归分析显示,年龄、性别、糖尿病或病变部位与MACE及全因死亡率之间无关联。所有结局的研究均具有同质性。
与RAPB相比,RACB发生MACE、全因死亡率、器械成功率及并发症的风险相似,但靶病变血运重建风险较低。